BOISE — Attorney General Raúl Labrador filed a supplemental brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant immediate review of Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act rather than sending the case back to a lower court. The brief argues that vital constitutional questions about sex-based classifications and women’s athletic opportunities require the Court’s urgent attention.
“While we’ve been fighting for fair and equal athletic competition, activists have been pushing an agenda that would ultimately sideline women and girls in their own sports,” said Attorney General Labrador. “Many athletic associations around the world have recognized the obvious truth that men and women are biologically different, and allowing men in women’s sports would create a dangerous, unfair environment for women to showcase their incredible talent. We’re asking the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold our law and ensure that women and girls get the opportunities they deserve.”
The supplemental brief in Little v. Hecox was filed after the Court held the case pending its decision in United States v. Skrmetti. However, that recent decision did not resolve the fundamental constitutional questions at stake in Idaho’s case. The brief argues that critical circuit splits remain unresolved, including whether biological sex should be defined objectively or subjectively in equal protection cases, and whether transgender identity qualifies as a quasi-suspect classification.
Idaho’s brief emphasizes that 27 states have now enacted laws protecting women’s sports, and both the NCAA and federal government have announced policies excluding biological males from female competitions. Despite this momentum, women and girls continue losing medals, podium spots, and athletic opportunities in jurisdictions where courts have blocked these protections.
The brief warns that sending the case back to a lower court would only delay the inevitable resolution of these issues while continuing to harm female athletes. It notes that the Ninth Circuit’s current ruling places schools in an impossible position, requiring athletic divisions based on testosterone levels while risking federal funding loss for non-compliance with federal directives protecting women’s sports.
Attorney General Labrador continues defending Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act in federal court. The case represents a critical opportunity for the Supreme Court to resolve nationwide confusion and protect the integrity of women’s sports across America.
Read the brief here.
One reply on “AG Labrador Asks Supreme Court to Review Idaho’s Law Protecting Women’s Sports”
CRAPS GAME ALERT!
Asking the “Supreme” Court to determine anything moral is a craps game, at best. And even if, at any given time, they happen to rule righteously, a future “Supreme” Court can reverse any previous decision.
This is true because there is no immutable standard (found only in the Bible’s triune moral law) that dictates the third branch of the Constitutional Republic (or the other two branches), and hasn’t since the inception of the biblically seditious Constitution as the law of the land:
“…Nowhere does the Constitution stipulate that judges must rule on behalf of Yahweh, rendering decisions based upon His commandments, statutes, and judgments as required in Exodus 18. That not even one constitutional framer contended for Yahweh,3 as did King Jehoshaphat, speaks volumes about the framers’ disregard for Him and His judicial system:
‘And he [King Jehoshaphat] set judges in the land throughout all the fenced cities of Judah, city by city, and said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for YHWH,4 who is with you in the judgment…. And he charged them, saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of YHWH, faithfully, and with a perfect heart.’ (2 Chronicles 19:5-9)….”
For more, see Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at bible versus constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 6.
See also Chapter 4 “Article 1: Legislative Usurpation.”
Also, Chapter 5 “Article 2: Executive Usurpation.”
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”